Japanese Imports to Ireland

madmac187

Hi all, I'm looking at possibly picking up a Mitsubishi Pajero 2.8. I have been looking and everything seems very hacked, i know age and all. But i was wondering what has killed the grey imports of vehicles from Japan can anyone tell me?

Chris_Heilong

The recession and a strong yen have not helped but things have gotten better again, the VRT crowd are the only real issue as they are taking most of the more popular imports off their calculator so they can assess them on a case by case basis.

madmac187

I wondered, just looking for an older unhocked pajero and cannot find one at all.

colm_mcm

Look for a Shogun. I got a minter from the UK a few years ago.

madmac187

I have seen one or two alright, low enough mileage dont look as abused as most here. Not sure whether 2.8 or 2.5, i know the 2.8 has more grunt but it is much harder on diesel, which is better in terms of reliability?

colm_mcm

2.8 is the way to go.
A lot of the uk ones have rusty chassis though.
Was getting around 25mpg on mine IIRC

Do you actually need something as heavy duty?

vinnie13

,i had a 2.8 and it was great,thirsty but would pull anything nice autobox to.
mine came from the uk was spotless it cost about the same as one here but the spec was higher and was better looked fter with history

madmac187

colm_mcm wrote: »

2.8 is the way to go.
A lot of the uk ones have rusty chassis though.
Was getting around 25mpg on mine IIRC

Do you actually need something as heavy duty?

I want one to be honest, had a 3.4 landcruiser and let it go. Great car though did serious mileage and it never broke

Cee-Jay-Cee

SIMI and the government killed the Japanese import market. The yen had an effect but it was all but dead when the yen got stronger.

SIMI dove their damnest to convince motorists and the insurance industry that jap imports were vastly different to their European equivalent and that parts were difficult to source. Insurance companies still use that pathetic and completely false excuse for not insuring them which shows exactly how little the motor insurance industry actually knows about the business they're in.

The government were earning a fortune in VRT and duty but got greedy and tried to increase VRT which backfired and ao they lost a sure revenue earner.

This country has the most backward outdated and pathetic motoring industry in the civilised world. The emissions based tax system is a complete joke and all but destroyed the car sales industry. The insurance market haven't a clue what they're at half the time and employ complete **** with no real world experience in any aspect of their business. The NCT regime is a fix and nothing more than a revenue earner. Car safety isn't really a consideration. VRT is a double tax and illegal yet the government choose to pay the gives for continuing to implement it rather than give it up.

colm_mcm

I'd rather a Hilux Surf 3.0 if I was doing it again.

blindside88

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

SIMI and the government killed the Japanese import market. The yen had an effect but it was all but dead when the yen got stronger.

SIMI dove their damnest to convince motorists and the insurance industry that jap imports were vastly different to their European equivalent and that parts were difficult to source. Insurance companies still use that pathetic and completely false excuse for not insuring them which shows exactly how little the motor insurance industry actually knows about the business they're in.

The government were earning a fortune in VRT and duty but got greedy and tried to increase VRT which backfired and ao they lost a sure revenue earner.

This country has the most backward outdated and pathetic motoring industry in the civilised world. The emissions based tax system is a complete joke and all but destroyed the car sales industry. The insurance market haven't a clue what they're at half the time and employ complete **** with no real world experience in any aspect of their business. The NCT regime is a fix and nothing more than a revenue earner. Car safety isn't really a consideration. VRT is a double tax and illegal yet the government choose to pay the gives for continuing to implement it rather than give it up.

Get off the fence there lad

It's a shame the lack of jap imports now and I don't want to drag this off topic but some of your points are questionable. The insurance industry (I work in it but not motor anymore) bases its prices on risk and jap imports as a whole are high risk, if you look at the majority of drivers of jap imports they are generally young drivers. I'm not saying it's all drivers but it has to be based on the market as a whole and generally high powered cars + young drivers= big claims. Also you can't deny since importing became big the amout of "2.0 litre twin turbo but 1.0 litre on the log book" cars have increased (exaggeration I know). In relation to VRT I've heard the arguement before and wondered why knowing has ever challenged it in European court of it's an illegal tax?

madmac187

Thanks for the help guys, think the uk is the way to go. I did see a 2.8 with 56k on it with paperwork to prove, i might make an enquiry.

JohnBoy26

madmac187 wrote: »

I want one to be honest, had a 3.4 landcruiser and let it go. Great car though did serious mileage and it never broke

Why not get another Land cruiser? The shogun/pajaro is no substitute imo.

Cee-Jay-Cee

blindside88 wrote: »

Get off the fence there lad

It's a shame the lack of jap imports now and I don't want to drag this off topic but some of your points are questionable. The insurance industry (I work in it but not motor anymore) bases its prices on risk and jap imports as a whole are high risk, if you look at the majority of drivers of jap imports they are generally young drivers. I'm not saying it's all drivers but it has to be based on the market as a whole and generally high powered cars + young drivers= big claims. Also you can't deny since importing became big the amout of "2.0 litre twin turbo but 1.0 litre on the log book" cars have increased (exaggeration I know). In relation to VRT I've heard the arguement before and wondered why knowing has ever challenged it in European court of it's an illegal tax?

It doesnt need to be challenged. It's accepted that's it's in contravention of European trade laws. The government are fined annually for failing to get rid of it but it's cheaper to pay the fine than lose the revenue from it.
I acceot your point about Japanese omers snd driver profile but that doesn't explain why someone like me with 20+ years NCB, no penalty points, no claims, and a full licence for 20+ years cannot get insurance on a Japanese import. They should base their quotations on the individual driver not the car.

Zubeneschamali

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

It doesnt need to be challenged. It's accepted that's it's in contravention of European trade laws. The government are fined annually for failing to get rid of it but it's cheaper to pay the fine than lose the revenue from it.

This is what is technically known as complete baloney.

madmac187

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Why not get another Land cruiser? The shogun/pajaro is no substitute imo.

I thought about it but I wouldnt drive a 3.4 here and the 3.0 has an aluminium head and can blow head gasket because of different expansion rates of aluminum head and cast iron block. Plus i learned to drive on a 2.5 Pajero.

JohnBoy26

madmac187 wrote: »

I thought about it but I wouldnt drive a 3.4 here and the 3.0 has an aluminium head and can blow head gasket because of different expansion rates of aluminum head and cast iron block. Plus i learned to drive on a 2.5 Pajero.

If your worried about head gaskets I wouldn't be going for a pajaro. The cylinder heads are soft on them and can crack.

even the 3.0 lancruiser is a far better yoke tbh.

mullingar

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

It doesnt need to be challenged. It's accepted that's it's in contravention of European trade laws. The government are fined annually for failing to get rid of it but it's cheaper to pay the fine than lose the revenue from it.

Source/link please or I call pure bull.

hi5

What Revenue say about VRT being illegal...

I thought VRT was illegal under EU law?

That is not the case.

Member States are entitled to charge national taxes provided that there is no discrimination against imported goods in favour of indigenous goods.

VRT is a national tax in Ireland and does not contravene EU law in that the VRT payable on the registration of an imported vehicle is equal to the amount of residual VRT contained in a similar vehicle already in the State.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/vrt/faqs-vrt.html#question2